Literature DB >> 28727613

Aberrometry Repeatability and Agreement with Autorefraction.

Mylan T Nguyen1, David A Berntsen.   

Abstract

SIGNIFICANCE: Commercially available aberrometers are essential to clinical studies evaluating refractive error and image quality. The Discovery System (Innovative Visual Systems, Elmhurst, IL) is a promising clinical instrument that allows investigators to export aberration data for research and analysis purposes. An assessment of the Discovery System's performance is essential to the interpretation of the data obtained.
PURPOSE: The aims of this study were to determine the between-visit repeatability of refractive error and higher-order aberration measurements with the Discovery System and to examine between-instrument agreement of refractive error measurements with the Discovery System and Grand Seiko WAM-5500 open-field autorefractor (Grand Seiko Co., Hiroshima, Japan).
METHODS: Cycloplegic refractive error values from the Discovery System (over a 3-mm pupil) and the Grand Seiko autorefractor were converted to power vectors (M, J0, and J45), and averaged. Zernike coefficients were also calculated by the Discovery System over a 6-mm pupil through the sixth radial order. Between-visit repeatability and agreement were evaluated using Bland-Altman difference-versus-mean plots. A t-test compared each mean difference (bias) to zero, and the 95% limits of agreement were calculated.
RESULTS: Twenty-five young adults with a mean (±SD) cycloplegic spherical-equivalent refractive error of -2.91 ± 1.85 diopters (D) (range, -6.96 to +0.74 D) were enrolled. There were no significant between-visit differences with the Discovery System for M, J0, J45, third- through sixth-order root mean square (RMS), higher-order RMS, or spherical aberration (all P > .30), and the repeatability for defocus and higher-order RMS were ±0.31 D and ±0.095 μm, respectively, for a 6-mm pupil. At a 3-mm pupil, the Discovery System, on average, measured slightly more positive values than the Grand Seiko for M (0.28 D), J0 (0.11 D), and J45 (0.12 D; all P < .005).
CONCLUSIONS: The Discovery System was very repeatable and would be an appropriate instrument to measure cycloplegic refractive error and higher-order aberration changes in adults. Small differences in refractive error were found between the Discovery System and Grand Seiko.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28727613      PMCID: PMC5578873          DOI: 10.1097/OPX.0000000000001107

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Optom Vis Sci        ISSN: 1040-5488            Impact factor:   1.973


  46 in total

1.  Test-retest reliability of clinical Shack-Hartmann measurements.

Authors:  Xu Cheng; Nikole L Himebaugh; Pete S Kollbaum; Larry N Thibos; Arthur Bradley
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 4.799

2.  Evaluation of an open-field autorefractor's ability to measure refraction and hence potential to assess objective accommodation in pseudophakes.

Authors:  James Stuart Wolffsohn; Leon Nicholas Davies; Shehzad Anjam Naroo; Phillip Jonathan Buckhurst; George Anthony Gibson; Navneet Gupta; Jennifer Patricia Craig; Sunil Shah
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2010-07-23       Impact factor: 4.638

3.  The effect of overnight contact lens corneal reshaping on higher-order aberrations and best-corrected visual acuity.

Authors:  David A Berntsen; Joseph T Barr; G Lynn Mitchell
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 1.973

4.  Three-dimensional relationship between high-order root-mean-square wavefront error, pupil diameter, and aging.

Authors:  Raymond A Applegate; William J Donnelly; Jason D Marsack; Darren E Koenig; Konrad Pesudovs
Journal:  J Opt Soc Am A Opt Image Sci Vis       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 2.129

Review 5.  A review of peripheral refraction techniques.

Authors:  Cathleen Fedtke; Klaus Ehrmann; Brien A Holden
Journal:  Optom Vis Sci       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 1.973

6.  Comparison of corneal topographic measurements and high order aberrations in keratoconus and normal eyes.

Authors:  Hatice Nur Colak; Feride Aylin Kantarci; Aydin Yildirim; Mehmet Gurkan Tatar; Hasan Goker; Hasim Uslu; Bulent Gurler
Journal:  Cont Lens Anterior Eye       Date:  2016-07-06       Impact factor: 3.077

7.  Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement.

Authors:  J M Bland; D G Altman
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1986-02-08       Impact factor: 79.321

8.  Changes in Peripheral Refraction, Higher-Order Aberrations, and Accommodative Lag With a Radial Refractive Gradient Contact Lens in Young Myopes.

Authors:  Jaume Pauné; Solène Thivent; Jesús Armengol; Lluisa Quevedo; Miguel Faria-Ribeiro; José M González-Méijome
Journal:  Eye Contact Lens       Date:  2016-11       Impact factor: 2.018

9.  Comparison of visual and refractive outcomes following femtosecond laser- assisted lasik with smile in patients with myopia or myopic astigmatism.

Authors:  Sri Ganesh; Rishika Gupta
Journal:  J Refract Surg       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 3.573

10.  Population spherical aberration: associations with ametropia, age, corneal curvature, and image quality.

Authors:  Amanda C Kingston; Ian G Cox
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2013-05-22
View more
  5 in total

1.  Image Quality Metric Derived Refractions Predicted to Improve Visual Acuity Beyond Habitual Refraction for Patients With Down Syndrome.

Authors:  Ayeswarya Ravikumar; Julia S Benoit; Jason D Marsack; Heather A Anderson
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2019-05-20       Impact factor: 3.283

2.  Impact of Pupil Diameter on Objective Refraction Determination and Predicted Visual Acuity.

Authors:  Heather A Anderson; Ayeswary Ravikumar; Julia S Benoit; Jason D Marsack
Journal:  Transl Vis Sci Technol       Date:  2019-12-12       Impact factor: 3.283

3.  Validation of an Independent Web-Based Tool for Measuring Visual Acuity and Refractive Error (the Manifest versus Online Refractive Evaluation Trial): Prospective Open-Label Noninferiority Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Robert P L Wisse; Marc B Muijzer; Francesco Cassano; Daniel A Godefrooij; Yves F D M Prevoo; Nienke Soeters
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2019-11-08       Impact factor: 5.428

4.  Assesment of the QuickSee wavefront autorefractor for characterizing refractive errors in school-age children.

Authors:  Andrea Gil; Carlos S Hernández; Pablo Pérez-Merino; Marcos Rubio; Gonzalo Velarde; María Abellanas-Lodares; Ángeles Román-Daza; Nicolás Alejandre; Ignacio Jiménez-Alfaro; Ignacio Casares; Shivang R Dave; Daryl Lim; Eduardo Lage
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-10-28       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Agreement and Repeatability of Central and Peripheral Refraction by One Novel Multispectral-Based Refractor.

Authors:  Weicong Lu; Rongyuan Ji; Wenzhi Ding; Yuyin Tian; Keli Long; Zhen Guo; Lin Leng
Journal:  Front Med (Lausanne)       Date:  2021-12-09
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.